Workplace

As OnlyFans abandons sex workers, here’s who is filling the void

Sex workers and porn sites are skeptical of OnlyFans' excuses for banning "sexually explicit conduct" and say that they will not be deterred.

Jasmine, a creator who shared her sex work on OnlyFans

Sex workers and porn provider sites are skeptical that payment-processor demands actually necessitate OnlyFans banning porn.

Photo: Jasmine

In the days after OnlyFans first announced it would ban porn, thousands of sex workers created new accounts at JustFor.fans, applied for identity verification and flooded the porn site's customer service inbox. JustFor.fans, often called the second-choice streaming site for OnlyFans creators, saw its server traffic jump more than three times its average (and stay there) after OnlyFans said it would be prohibiting what it calls "sexually explicit conduct" beginning in October.

Thousands more creators shared on Twitter, Reddit and other online forums that they would be leaving OnlyFans in the coming months. Some communities started offering how-tos for sex workers to transfer their content and subscriber bases to new sites. Some creators — if they could afford it — announced they would be leaving the sex worker business entirely. Five days later, the company reversed course, telling creators it had "suspended" the porn ban because it had "secured the necessary assurances" to continue supporting them.

OnlyFans had said that it will ban "sexually explicit conduct" because the move is necessary to maintain its status with banks and payment providers like Visa and Mastercard, which have strict rules for websites that provide pornography, including age and identity verification requirements, documented consent and a review process for illegal material.

But sex workers and porn provider sites are skeptical that payment-processor demands actually necessitated OnlyFans banning porn. Many have instead suggested that the company chose to abandon porn because it is seeking venture capital investment and the traditional model of growth for tech companies, neither of which are particularly fond of explicit content. Axios reported that OnlyFans was struggling to find VC investors the same day that the company announced it would be banning sexually explicit conduct.

"Everybody just thinks this is a Mastercard or Visa issue, and it's not. Mastercard has several times over said that they are not trying to remove the internet of porn, they are trying to remove the internet of illegal content and nonconsensual content. There are a whole lot of factors about OnlyFans doing what they are doing, and only a small percentage of it has to do with Mastercard," Dominic Ford, the founder of JustFor.fans, told Protocol. "It seems to me that the major stakeholders of OnlyFans have made their money and are happy to get out and sink the ship while they are doing it."

"The proposed October 1, 2021 changes are no longer required due to banking partners' assurances that OnlyFans can support all genres of creators," the company said in a statement to Protocol.

OnlyFans creators have long complained about the company's inability to address illegal content and sex worker reports about consent, harassment and other issues. The new suspension of the ban has not changed the minds of sex workers feeling burned and abandoned; many said they will continue to transition away from OnlyFans and no longer trust the company's assurances on Twitter and Reddit forums. "I do think that those of us who can move sites regardless should since OF have proven time and again that they don't care about the SWs on the platform," one creator wrote.

Sex workers need robust systems of protection wherever they operate; while OnlyFans was a cheaper way to make money than some other sites, it didn't provide that protection. "Being someone that was a creator on that platform for a year and a half now, I very much knew that I only existed as a money-making tool for them. My emails never get replied to, my calls for help with messages were getting ignored. I think that's pretty much an indicator of how they feel about their users," Jasmine, a creator who shared her sex work on OnlyFans through a high-performing account, explained.

"OnlyFans introduced sex work to a lot more people, yes, but they have always done it in such a terrible way. They don't understand or care for the creators on their platform. They didn't moderate their content, they let 18-year-old girls who don't know anything get on and then get their nudes leaked. They do nothing to protect creators," Jasmine said.

Jasmine has already begun to remove her content from the site and wonders if she'll ever return to sex work online. She's building her own platform for creators and content that's safe-for-work, and wants to focus on that for now. "I'm done with OnlyFans, and it seems like they are done with us, too. They want to become a mainstream platform that can get investors and make more money from celebrities."

Even if JustFor.fans attracts most of OnlyFans' current sex-work business, Ford has no plans to ever expand beyond pornography — and sees that as a selling point for sex workers. "We all saw what the numbers were coming out of the OnlyFans pitch deck, right? If we could achieve half of that, then I will be very happy," he said. "I don't know what their play was, but our play is to make money in the adult entertainment space, period. Those eyes are wide enough, I don't need wider eyes. If we can replace OnlyFans, who evidently were pulling in something like $150 million a month, trust me, I'll be fine."

Ford doesn't foresee issues with payment processors as JustFor.fans continues to grow, and spends most of his day working with banks and vendors. His site already offers a content-reporting system like the one required by Mastercard (in addition to its identity verification process), and they are in the process of launching a consent program that allows creators to request, track and save consent from partners who are registered on the platform, as well as those who aren't. (All of JustFor.fans' staff are current or former sex workers). The company is also hiring more staffers for its prepublication review process.

"I have been inundated with payment vendors who want to be another third-party. We have also accepted crypto as a payment option for years," he said. "Knock on wood, we're fairly well placed to take over for OnlyFans, we're getting all of our ducks in the row. We're also working very closely with our banking partners and our credit card partners to make sure that they feel we are in line with Mastercard's new set of rules."

Thousands of people have registered for account verification with Ford's site in the last few days, but Jasmine isn't one of them. JustFor.fans has a reputation as a place mainly for male sex workers, while OnlyFans' content was produced predominantly by women. Jasmine is skeptical of any site that isn't run by women, for women, who have been in or remain in the sex work community. (There are countless, though lesser-known, alternatives to JustFor.fans, like AVN Stars and FanCentro).

"Obviously there are so many alternatives, everyone has made their own little copy," she said. "I don't know, as a woman, as a content creator, as a sex worker, I don't trust any of these platforms because they are all built by men who don't do any of this work."

SKOREA-ENTERTAINMENT-GAMING-MICROSOFT-XBOX
A visitor plays a game using Microsoft's Xbox controller at a flagship store of SK Telecom in Seoul on November 10, 2020. (Photo by Jung Yeon-je / AFP) (Photo by JUNG YEON-JE/AFP via Getty Images)

On this episode of the Source Code podcast: Nick Statt joins the show to discuss Microsoft’s $68.7 billion acquisition of Activision Blizzard, and what it means for the tech and game industries. Then, Issie Lapowsky talks about a big week in antitrust reform, and whether real progress is being made in the U.S. Finally, Hirsh Chitkara explains why AT&T, Verizon, the FAA and airlines have been fighting for months about 5G coverage.

For more on the topics in this episode:

Keep Reading Show less
David Pierce

David Pierce ( @pierce) is Protocol's editorial director. Prior to joining Protocol, he was a columnist at The Wall Street Journal, a senior writer with Wired, and deputy editor at The Verge. He owns all the phones.

COVID-19 accelerated what many CEOs and CTOs have struggled to do for the past decade: It forced organizations to be agile and adjust quickly to change. For all the talk about digital transformation over the past decade, when push came to shove, many organizations realized they had made far less progress than they thought.

Now with the genie of rapid change out of the bottle, we will never go back to accepting slow and steady progress from our organizations. To survive and thrive in times of disruption, you need to build a resilient, adaptable business with systems and processes that will keep you nimble for years to come. An essential part of business agility is responding to change by quickly developing new applications and adapting old ones. IT faces an unprecedented demand for new applications. According to IDC, by 2023, more than 500 million digital applications and services will be developed and deployed — the same number of apps that were developed in the last 40 years.[1]

Keep Reading Show less
Denise Broady, CMO, Appian
Denise oversees the Marketing and Communications organization where she is responsible for accelerating the marketing strategy and brand recognition across the globe. Denise has over 24+ years of experience as a change agent scaling businesses from startups, turnarounds and complex software companies. Prior to Appian, Denise worked at SAP, WorkForce Software, TopTier and Clarkston Group. She is also a two-time published author of “GRC for Dummies” and “Driven to Perform.” Denise holds a double degree in marketing and production and operations from Virginia Tech.
Policy

Congress’ antitrust push has a hate speech problem

Sen. Klobuchar’s antitrust bill is supposed to promote competition. So why are advocates afraid it could also promote extremists?

The bill as written could make it a lot riskier for large tech companies to deplatform or demote companies that violate their rules.

Photo: Photo by Elizabeth Frantz-Pool/Getty Images

The antitrust bill that passed the Senate Judiciary Committee Thursday and is now headed to the Senate floor is, at its core, an attempt to prevent the likes of Apple, Amazon and Google from boosting their own products and services on the marketplaces and platforms they own.

But upon closer inspection, some experts say, the bill as written could make it a lot riskier for large tech companies to deplatform or demote companies that violate their rules.

Keep Reading Show less
Issie Lapowsky

Issie Lapowsky ( @issielapowsky) is Protocol's chief correspondent, covering the intersection of technology, politics, and national affairs. She also oversees Protocol's fellowship program. Previously, she was a senior writer at Wired, where she covered the 2016 election and the Facebook beat in its aftermath. Prior to that, Issie worked as a staff writer for Inc. magazine, writing about small business and entrepreneurship. She has also worked as an on-air contributor for CBS News and taught a graduate-level course at New York University's Center for Publishing on how tech giants have affected publishing.

Boost 2

Can Matt Mullenweg save the internet?

He's turning Automattic into a different kind of tech giant. But can he take on the trillion-dollar walled gardens and give the internet back to the people?

Matt Mullenweg, CEO of Automattic and founder of WordPress, poses for Protocol at his home in Houston, Texas.
Photo: Arturo Olmos for Protocol

In the early days of the pandemic, Matt Mullenweg didn't move to a compound in Hawaii, bug out to a bunker in New Zealand or head to Miami and start shilling for crypto. No, in the early days of the pandemic, Mullenweg bought an RV. He drove it all over the country, bouncing between Houston and San Francisco and Jackson Hole with plenty of stops in national parks. In between, he started doing some tinkering.

The tinkering is a part-time gig: Most of Mullenweg’s time is spent as CEO of Automattic, one of the web’s largest platforms. It’s best known as the company that runs WordPress.com, the hosted version of the blogging platform that powers about 43% of the websites on the internet. Since WordPress is open-source software, no company technically owns it, but Automattic provides tools and services and oversees most of the WordPress-powered internet. It’s also the owner of the booming ecommerce platform WooCommerce, Day One, the analytics tool Parse.ly and the podcast app Pocket Casts. Oh, and Tumblr. And Simplenote. And many others. That makes Mullenweg one of the most powerful CEOs in tech, and one of the most important voices in the debate over the future of the internet.

Keep Reading Show less
David Pierce

David Pierce ( @pierce) is Protocol's editorial director. Prior to joining Protocol, he was a columnist at The Wall Street Journal, a senior writer with Wired, and deputy editor at The Verge. He owns all the phones.

Workplace

Ask a tech worker: How many of your colleagues have caught omicron?

Millions of workers called in sick in recent weeks. How is tech handling it?

A record number of Americans called in sick with COVID-19 in recent weeks. Even with high vaccination rates, tech companies aren’t immune.

Illustration: Christopher T. Fong/Protocol

Welcome back to Ask a Tech Worker! For this recurring feature, I’ve been roaming downtown San Francisco at lunchtime to ask tech employees about how the workplace is changing. This week, I caught up with tech workers about what their companies are doing to avoid omicron outbreaks, and whether many of their colleagues had been out sick lately. Got an idea for a future topic? Email me.

Omicron stops for no one, it seems. Between Dec. 29 and Jan. 10, 8.8 million Americans missed work to either recover from COVID-19 or care for someone who was recovering, according to the Census Bureau. That number crushed the previous record of 6.6 million from last January, and tripled the numbers from early last month.

Keep Reading Show less
Allison Levitsky
Allison Levitsky is a reporter at Protocol covering workplace issues in tech. She previously covered big tech companies and the tech workforce for the Silicon Valley Business Journal. Allison grew up in the Bay Area and graduated from UC Berkeley.

The fast-growing paychecks of Big Tech’s biggest names

Tech giants had a huge pandemic, and their execs are getting paid.

TIm Cook received $82 million in stock awards on top of his $3 million salary as Apple's CEO.

Photo: Mario Tama/Getty Images

Tech leaders are making more than ever.

As tech giants thrive amid the pandemic, companies like Meta, Alphabet and Microsoft have continued to pay their leaders accordingly: Big Tech CEO pay is higher than ever. In the coming months, we’ll begin seeing a lot of companies release their executive compensation from the past year as fiscal 2022 begins.

Keep Reading Show less
Nat Rubio-Licht
Nat Rubio-Licht is a Los Angeles-based news writer at Protocol. They graduated from Syracuse University with a degree in newspaper and online journalism in May 2020. Prior to joining the team, they worked at the Los Angeles Business Journal as a technology and aerospace reporter.
Latest Stories
Bulletins